Sustaining School–University Partnerships: Threats, Challenges and Critical Success Factors
The purpose of this chapter is to consider the threats and challenges which impact on the sustainability of a partnership. By identifying elements that contribute to success and underpin the future sustainability of the relationships, an understanding of how the theoretical framing (Interpretive Framework) for university–school partnerships draws together the facilitation and maintenance of partnerships is gained. The focus is a consideration of each of the aspects of the Interpretive Framework, as outlined in earlier chapters, and a discussion of the threats and challenges evident in data drawn from partnership stakeholders including teacher educators, pre-service teachers, teachers and principals. Three key issues drawn from the data are raised and analysed and are presented as sub-themes. These sub-themes are the elements required for: sustainability; measuring sustainability; and threats to sustainability of partnership practices.
KeywordsPartnerships Sustainability Science teacher education School-based approaches Teacher education Interpretive Framework Primary science Pre-service teachers Critical success factors
- Arthur, M., Gordon, C., & Butterfield, N. (2003). Classroom management: Creating positive learning environments. Southbank: Thomson.Google Scholar
- Bybee, R. W. (1989). Science and technology education for the elementary years: Frameworks for curriculum and instruction. Washington, DC: The National Centre for Improving Instruction.Google Scholar
- Bloomfield, D, & Nguyen, H.T. (2015). Creating and sustaining professional learning partnerships: activity theory as an analytic tool, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(11).Google Scholar
- Chubb, I. (2013). Science, technology, engineering and mathematics in the national interest: A strategic approach: A Position Paper. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
- Hobbs, L., Chittleborough, G., Jones, M., Kenny, J., Campbell, C., Gilbert, A., & Redman, C. (2015). School-based pedagogies and partnerships in primary science teacher education: The Science Teacher Education Partnerships with Schools (STEPS) Project: Office of Learning and Teaching.Google Scholar
- Kruger, T., Davies, A., Eckersley, B., Newell, F., & Cherednichenko, B. (2009). Effective and sustainable university-school partnerships: Beyond determined efforts by inspired individuals, Teaching Australia—Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership Limited.Google Scholar
- Suchman, L. (1994). Working relations of technology production and use. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 2(1–2), 21–39.Google Scholar
- Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group. (TEMAG) (2014). Teacher education ministerial advisory group issues paper. TEMAG. From http://studentsfirst.gov.au/files/temag_issues_paper_-_april_2014_4.pdf.
- Tytler, R. (2007). Re-imagining Science Education: Engaging students in science for Australia’s future. Australian Education Review, Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
- Tytler, R., Osborne, J. F., Williams, G., Tytler, K., Clark, J. C., & Tomei, A. (2008). Opening up pathways: Engagement in STEM across the Primary-Secondary school transition: A review of the literature concerning supports and barriers to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics engagement at Primary-Secondary transition. Commissioned by the Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Melbourne: Deakin University.Google Scholar